Telangana High Court
Kyla Lakshma Reddy Lakshman , ... vs The State Of Telangana on 3 March, 2023
Bench: K.Surender
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA
AT HYDERABAD
*****
Criminal Petition No.10924 OF 2022
Between:
Kyla Lakshma Reddy @ Lakshman @ Lucky ... Petitioner
And
The State of Telangana,
Rep. through Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad and another. ... Respondents
DATE OF JUDGMENT PRONOUNCED: 03.03.2023
Submitted for approval.
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
1 Whether Reporters of Local
newspapers may be allowed to see Yes/No
the Judgments?
2 Whether the copies of judgment
may be marked to Law Yes/No
Reporters/Journals
3 Whether Their Ladyship/Lordship
wish to see the fair copy of the Yes/No
Judgment?
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
2
* THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURENDER
+ CRL.P. No. 10924 of 2022
% Dated 03.03.2023
# Kyla Lakshma Reddy @ Lakshman @ Lucky ... Petitioner
And
$ The State of Telangana,
Rep. through Public Prosecutor,
High Court for the State of Telangana,
Hyderabad and another ... Respondents
! Counsel for the Petitioner: Sri J.Dheeraj reddy
^ Counsel for the Respondents: Sri S.Sudershan
Additional Public Prosecutor for R1
>HEAD NOTE:
? Cases referred
1 AIR 2021 SC 4764
2
Criminal Petition No.6456 of 2016, dated 21.01.2022
3
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10924 of 2022
ORDER:
1. This Criminal Petition is filed to quash the proceedings
against the petitioner/Accused in PRC No.30 of 2022 on the file of
XIV Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Medchal-Malkajgiri District
at Kukatpally.
2. It is the case of the prosecution that the sister of the 2nd
respondent committed suicide by swallowing four or five types of
different tablets. The 2nd respondent lodged the complaint stating
that the reason for her committing suicide was not known and
there is no suspicion about anybody regarding the death.
3. The police, during the course of investigation, on examination
of witnesses L.Ws.4 and 5, who are the friends of the deceased,
found that this petitioner and the deceased were friends and lovers
since ten years. This petitioner had promised the deceased that he
would marry her and they were in relation over the said period.
However, the petitioner had cheated the deceased and after going
around with her for ten years, he got engaged with another girl and
got married. Unable to bear the said trauma of the petitioner
marrying another woman by cheating the deceased, the deceased
committed suicide. The police filed charge sheet against the
petitioner for the offences under Sections 417, 420 and 306 of IPC.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit
that in the entire complaint there is no mention about this
petitioner. Further, even considering the investigation done by the
police, no offence under Section 306 of IPC is made. In support of
his contention, he relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Geo Varghese v. The State of Rajasthan1,
wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that to constitute an
offence of abetment of suicide under Section 306 of IPC, there must
be an allegation either direct or indirect act of incitement to the
commission of offence of suicide and mere allegations of
harassment of the deceased would not be sufficient to convict a
person. If a person is committing suicide on account of hyper
sensitivity and allegations attributed to the accused is otherwise
not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly situated person to take
the extreme step of committing suicide, it would be unsafe to hold
the accused guilty of abetment of suicide. However, the Court also
observed that every case on facts has to be decided.
AIR 2021 SC 4764
5. He also relied on the judgment of this Court in Patnam
Subramanyam v. Public Prosecutor, Hyderabad2. It was observed
that false promise of marriage should have a direct nexus to the
woman's decision to engage in sexual act when they are in relation
for a period of ten years. The contention that the girl engaged in
sexual act with the accused on the promise of marriage gets
diluted. Continuous relation itself would go to show that it was
consensual affair and not arising out of misconception of fact out of
a promise to marry.
6. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
would submit that the allegations are serious in nature and only
trial can determine whether the petitioner is responsible or not for
the suicide of the deceased.
7. In the present case, according to the witnesses, petitioner and
the deceased were on long term relation as friends and also on the
basis of petitioner's promise to marry the deceased. The witnesses
who are friends of the deceased stated that the deceased and the
petitioner herein used to go around to various places and
ultimately she was depressed on account of the petitioner marrying
someone else by cheating the deceased.
Criminal Petition No.6456 of 2016, dated 21.01.2022
8. Different persons react to a situation in a different manner.
Long term relationship of ten years between the deceased and the
petitioner and ultimately, petitioner leaving the deceased and
marrying another woman even without her knowledge appears to
be the reason, according to the investigation, for her suicide. The
evidence is circumstantial in nature. It is for the prosecution to
adduce evidence regarding the incitement or the circumstances
that abetted the deceased to commit suicide. Only for the reason of
there being relation over a period of ten years and failing to marry
does not mean the deceased was hyper sensitive to the situation
and did not react as normal person and committed suicide. The
relation in between the deceased and the petitioner was kept under
wraps by the deceased over a period of 10 years and only known
after the death. The family members of the deceased did not know
about her relation as seen from the complaint.
9. Instigation is to goad, provoke, incite or encourage doing an
act. Abetment would involve a mental process to intentionally aid a
person in doing a thing. In the present case, the trial Court has to
look into whether the acts of the petitioner amounted to instigating
the deceased to commit suicide or not, in the peculiar facts and
circumstances of the present case.
10. This Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has to look into the
circumstances cumulatively and cannot infer that no offence under
Section 306 of IPC is made out only for the reason of the petitioner
rejecting the marriage with the deceased. Since the narration of
the witnesses of the friends of the deceased would go to show that
the acts of the petitioner caused depression leading to commission
of suicide, this Court deems it appropriate to give the prosecution a
chance to examine their witnesses to elicit evidence and prove their
case. The accused also will have a fair chance of defending himself.
11. There are no grounds to quash the proceedings against the
petitioner and accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall
stand disposed.
__________________
K.SURENDER, J
Date:03.03.2023
Note: LR copy to be marked.
B/o.kvs
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMINAL PETITION No.10924 of 2022
Dated: 03.03.2023
kvs
